[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#879072: /boot/vmlinuz-4.14.0-rc5-arm64: eMMC corruption on Odroid-c2



Control: found 879072 4.14-1~exp1

On 2017-10-18, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> I tried upgrading from 4.13 to the 4.14.0-rc5 kernel, and it caused eMMC
> corruption, with messages like this scattered throughout the boot
> process:
>
> [   27.286913] mmcblk1: response CRC error sending r/w cmd command, card status 0xd00
> [   27.294374] mmcblk1: response CRC error sending r/w cmd command, card status 0xd00
> [   27.301021] print_req_error: I/O error, dev mmcblk1, sector 2052096
>
> After booting with this kernel, / was mounted read-only, the /boot
> partition required an fsck, and the swap partition needed to be
> reinitialized...

This patch to the device-tree seems to work reasonably well with
4.14-1~exp1:

From 56159e51bc67bd006c676546c5692e451e7e323d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@debian.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 10:58:52 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] Set eMMC maximum frequency to 100MHz.

---
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-gxbb-odroidc2.dts | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-gxbb-odroidc2.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-gxbb-odroidc2.dts
index 1ffa1c238a72..786a69b9736d 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-gxbb-odroidc2.dts
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-gxbb-odroidc2.dts
@@ -276,7 +276,7 @@
 	pinctrl-names = "default", "clk-gate";
 
 	bus-width = <8>;
-	max-frequency = <200000000>;
+	max-frequency = <100000000>;
 	non-removable;
 	disable-wp;
 	cap-mmc-highspeed;
-- 
2.11.0


Since the default value has been there since the original upstream
commit for eMMC support, I suspect other bugs hid the issue for 4.13 and
earlier...

There may be other trhings required to make this upstreamable, but at
least this much is working for me after a few hours, with some basic
read/write testing...


live well,
  vagrant

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: